Louis Gossett Jr
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2012
- Messages
- 12,783
- Reaction score
- 6,611
this seems like a particularly non-google business model
I don’t know sounds like a novel opportunity to me.
this seems like a particularly non-google business model
this seems like a particularly non-google business model
Movie Pass has mostly pivoted from the data aggregation sales idea to a market leverage gamble, ala Uber. Uber lost a shit load of money inorder to drive much of the taxi business out of the market, and create a need for Uber. So Movie Pass is losing a shit load of money building a huge subscriber base as fast as possible for 3 reasons:
1. To create a consumer friendly (cheap) business model (rideshare) that makes the past model (expensive) very unpopular in comparison (taxis) thus creating their own space in the market through the attrition of the previous model (taxi drivers literally killing themselves)
2. Leverage that increased traffic so that theater companies become dependent on the profit driven by Moviepass subscribers
3. Make it less expensive to partner (and subsidize) with Movie Pass instead of creating their own subscription services.
It's actually kind of genius. The death of the movie theater business has been advertised for a long time, so everyone knows the market is vulnerable. Moviepass is trying to wedge their way in as a middle man by driving new business to the theaters and demanding a percentage on it.
There's one problem with that comparison, though: Uber wasn't betting on taxi companies aligning with them. That's sort of the sticking point on your 2nd and 3rd reasons; why would AMC or Regal partner with MP or create their own subscription service, when MP is currently paying full price for every ticket and driving their revenue?
As for your first reason, you're envisioning some sort of mass revolt against cinemas under the threat of MP closing up shop, but that's just not going to happen. Most MP subscribers I've talked to tend to be realistic that their model is too good to be true, and are just sort of riding the wave as long as they can. If MP goes away, they're not going to go to cinemas less than they were before MP existed.
For the business model to make any sense, MP would have to grow significantly (I'm pretty sure I read they're currently responsible for something like 2% of ticket sales?), and they're already bankrupting themselves as it is, with each additional subscription adding to that loss leader. I don't think there's any way for them to grow to a point where they have the leverage you're talking about before they're forced to close permanently.
As to your other anecdote, it's incorrect.
https://www-vox-com.cdn.ampproject....rvive-theater-make-money-unlimited-cancel-amc
- their are currently 2 million subscribers and MP is counting on doubling that by 2019.
Another factor that you have to consider in theater profitability is how and when theaters receive traffic. There are probably 12-20 weeks a year where every theater is profitable, when the major tentpole films are released, but it's the remainder of the year that's killing the business. The fact that Movie Pass subscribers make up a disproportionate % of regular attendees gives them even more leverage.